IKBAL CHANDULAL SHAIKH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants are seeking suspension of sentence under Sec. 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C. for short) passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class and confirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (subordinate Appellate Court, for short).

(2.) The subordinate appellate Court cancelled the bail bonds of the accused and directed them to surrender before the trial Court for the execution of the sentence. Admittedly, soon after the decision of the appeal, the present applicants were not sent to jail under a conviction warrant, nor did the applicant surrender.

(3.) The learned counsel Mr. S. S. Panale and Mr. K. N. Shermale for the applicants have vehemently argued that Sec. 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure thus provides for suspension of sentence, and for suspension of sentence, the accused need not surrender. In other words, they have vehemently argued that for the suspension of the sentence before the High Court, surrender of the applicant is not sine qua non. The tone of their argument is once the Revision under sec. 397 Cr.P.C. is preferred, the High Court shall suspend the sentence unless the High Court Rules prescribe the Procedure directing the accused to surrender before the sentence is suspended. To bolster their arguments, they relied on the judgments and orders of this Court passed in Criminal Application No.1238 of 2020 in Criminal Revision Application No. 89 of 2020 [Popat Dattatraya Ajabe and other Vs. The State of Maharashtra] dtd. 3/8/2020 and Criminal Application No. 2743 of 2019 in Criminal Revision Application No. 232 of 2019 dtd. 12/6/2020. Relying strongly on these Judgments, they claimed that the applicant deserves suspension of sentence and bail till the conclusion of the revision petition.